Department of Operative Dentistry and Dental Materials, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Department of Periodontology and Implantology, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Dent Traumatol. 2023 Aug;39(4):314-323. doi: 10.1111/edt.12842. Epub 2023 Apr 1.
BACKGROUND/AIM: Mouthguards (MTG) are used to prevent dental trauma. However, their protective effect on esthetic restorations and whether modified MTGs are beneficial is uncertain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of hard inserts and air spaces in MTGs in protecting direct resin composite veneers during impact.
Twenty resin composite veneers (1.0 mm) were prepared on upper right central incisors on printed maxilla models using polyether. The effect of the MTGs was evaluated in four groups (n = 5): Con-MTG, conventional custom-fit MTGs made with two layers of ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA); Air-MTG, MTGs with the insertion of 2.0 mm air space between the two layers of EVA and tooth surface; PETG-MTG, MTGs with 1.0 mm of polyethylene terephthalate glycol-modified (PETG) inserted between the EVA layers; and No-MTG, comprising resin composite veneers without MTG. The printed models were fixed in a pendulum device, and the impact was performed at 30°. The strain (μS) and shock absorption (%) of the MTG were recorded using strain gauges. Failure modes and cracks were evaluated using macro photography and transillumination and analyzed using the chi-square test. Strain and shock absorption data were analyzed using the one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey's test (α = 0.05).
Mouthguards reduced strain and enhanced shock absorption, regardless of the MTG type (p < .001). Con-MTG, Air-MTG, and PETG-MTG had shock absorption rates of 76.1%, 72.3%, and 33.4%, respectively (p < .001). The single No-MTG model had a root fracture, while all the others had superficial damage. None of the MTG models had cracks or fractures.
Mouthguards protected the resin composite veneers. The Con-MTG and Air-MTG groups had lower strain and greater shock absorption than the PETG-MTG. Resin veneers had no cracks or damage following MTG use. However, 80% of the veneers had surface damage when no MTG was used.
背景/目的:防护牙套(MTG)用于防止牙外伤。然而,其对美学修复体的保护作用以及改良 MTG 是否有益尚不确定。本研究旨在评估 MTG 中的硬嵌体和空气间隙在冲击时保护直接树脂复合贴面的效果。
在印模上颌模型上使用聚醚在上颌右侧中切牙上制备 20 个树脂复合贴面(1.0 毫米)。将 MTG 的效果评估分为四组(n=5):对照 MTG,用两层乙烯-醋酸乙烯酯(EVA)制成的常规定制 MTG;Air-MTG,EVA 层与牙面之间插入 2.0 毫米空气间隙的 MTG;PETG-MTG,EVA 层之间插入 1.0 毫米聚对苯二甲酸乙二醇改性(PETG)的 MTG;No-MTG,不使用 MTG 的树脂复合贴面。将打印模型固定在摆锤装置中,以 30°进行冲击。使用应变计记录 MTG 的应变(μS)和减震(%)。使用宏观摄影和透光法评估失效模式和裂纹,并使用卡方检验进行分析。使用单向方差分析和 Tukey 检验(α=0.05)分析应变和减震吸收数据。
无论 MTG 类型如何,防护牙套都能降低应变并提高减震效果(p<0.001)。对照 MTG、Air-MTG 和 PETG-MTG 的减震率分别为 76.1%、72.3%和 33.4%(p<0.001)。单个 No-MTG 模型发生根折,而其他模型均为表面损伤。没有 MTG 模型出现裂纹或断裂。
防护牙套保护了树脂复合贴面。对照 MTG 和 Air-MTG 组的应变较低,减震效果优于 PETG-MTG。使用 MTG 后,树脂贴面没有裂纹或损伤。然而,当不使用 MTG 时,80%的贴面有表面损伤。